And again, the goal of the test isn’t so much to get all the competitor’s robots to perform a task identically, the goal of the test is to ensure that the programmers can demonstrate they know the basics of how to control the robot.
It is possible that some of the instruction was lost in translation. But still, this is stuff my elementary teams could do.
+1 for handing feedback to teams. Just stuff the rubrik in the notebook.
The translation conveyed everything the instructions asked for, the translation is just worded it in a way that made it a bit more unclear than it actually is.
Judging by the image title Not a joke, due to image title (“WeChat picture”), and t that both teams (9123C & the OP) competed at this event. If it is joke example, then why post it???
Also, while I agree the test has ambiguous wording, it’s not the team’s job to decide that. Instead, they complete the task given to them to the best of their ability, ambiguous wording or not. Frankly, if the team simply write “incomplete requirements” on the paper and handed it back to the test officiator, they would get DQed (simply because they were unable to complete requirements given to them). It’s really plain and simple, no need to get snarky over it. Plenty of exams in school have ambiguous wording, and when I ask the teacher, they say “well you should have known what I meant…”